It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

- 31K All Categories
- 26.2K LSAT
- 16K General
- 28 Sage Advice
- 4.9K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.6K Logic Games
- 73 Podcasts
- 189 Webinars
- 6 Scholarships
- 192 Test Center Reviews
- 1.9K Study Groups
- 101 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.3K Specific LSAT Dates
- 0 February 2024 LSAT
- 0 January 2024 LSAT
- 9 November 2023 LSAT
- 25 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 33 August 2023 LSAT
- 26 June 2023 LSAT
- 4.7K Not LSAT
- 3.8K Law School Admissions
- 10 Law School Explained
- 11 Forum Rules
- 539 Technical Problems
- 267 Off-topic

pfjddream
Free Trial Member

I understand the difference between either or and either or but not both

I am confused about the diagramming aspect and not sure if my way is correct

Either or (implies possibly both)

So, I think of this in negative terms (absence of a sufficient condition)

not A -> B

not B -> A

A -> may or may not have B (so AB is also possible)

versus

Either or but not both

So, I think of this in positive terms (presence of sufficient condition)

A -> not B

B -> not A

In this case, there no other possibility (both AB can never be possible)

Is there a way to show this using double sided arrows or double not arrows? I am confused about that.

I know that double sided arrows (<-->) are used for biconditionals like "if and only if" and "if but only if"

and double not arrows (<-I->) are used for neither nor

Is my reasoning correct?

Somehow I think that I have gotten myself mixed up with all this conditional logic stuff

I am confused about the diagramming aspect and not sure if my way is correct

Either or (implies possibly both)

So, I think of this in negative terms (absence of a sufficient condition)

not A -> B

not B -> A

A -> may or may not have B (so AB is also possible)

versus

Either or but not both

So, I think of this in positive terms (presence of sufficient condition)

A -> not B

B -> not A

In this case, there no other possibility (both AB can never be possible)

Is there a way to show this using double sided arrows or double not arrows? I am confused about that.

I know that double sided arrows (<-->) are used for biconditionals like "if and only if" and "if but only if"

and double not arrows (<-I->) are used for neither nor

Is my reasoning correct?

Somehow I think that I have gotten myself mixed up with all this conditional logic stuff